Why Should Delaware?
Reactions to a recently enacted affordable housing law have risen to the forefront of the state’s political conversation in recent months. Particularly in Sussex County, the legislation touches on residents’ concerns with overdevelopment and state encroachment on local control, generating a strong reaction from both municipal governments and candidates seeking office.
As Delaware’s primary election quickly approaches, a controversial affordable housing policy has become a flashpoint in Sussex County, dominating both closely watched primary races and local governments across the region.
Senate Bill 23, also known as the Housing for Every Delawarean Act, requires municipalities to adopt provisions aimed at increasing their affordable housing stock, including foregoing public hearings for some projects. The law has generated an outsized reaction in Sussex County compared to its northern counterparts.
This reaction has included Sussex County leaders calling the legislation “insidious,” and pausing public hearings on housing development proposals for an undetermined period of time. Some localities, including Lewes and Milton, have followed suit, also halting consideration of subdivision applications.
In addition to these government responses, the law has become a defining point of some of election campaigns, including a competitive Lewes-area statehouse Democratic primary and two Sussex County Council races.
Elected officials, candidates, political experts and residents have a number of explanations as to why SB 23 has overtaken the political conversation in Sussex County. But most reasons boil down to two topics consistently at the forefront of discourse within Delaware’s southernmost county: rapid development and local control.
“This directly affects Sussex County much more so than Kent and New Castle,” said Sussex County Administrator Todd Lawson, who has been vocal about his concerns with SB 23. “Sussex County is going to be different because we are the epicenter of growth.”
Others described the new law as the latest notch in the ongoing debate over local control between Sussex County and lawmakers in Dover, which flared in 2025 over an offshore wind project and continued this year when the General Assembly overrode a veto by Gov. Matt Meyer, doubling down on their requirement that the county loosen its stringent marijuana business regulations.
And while some local governments and candidates are laser-focused on SB 23, it is not clear whether county residents care as much about the legislation as the governmental actors.
Jill Hicks, a land use advocate who is running for Sussex County Council, said she has overwhelmingly run into residents who are worried about over-development and insufficient infrastructure rather than the nuts and bolts of who supports SB 23.
“When I’m knocking doors, nobody asks about it,” she said.
While the legislation’s long-term impacts on Sussex County remain to be seen, campaign yard signs calling for the repeal of the bill and elected officials’ comments criticizing its enactment continue to dominate the region’s political discourse.
The 20th district primary
In a Democratic primary in the historically competitive 20th Representative District, which encompasses Lewes and Milton, the election has become what some — including challenger Ruby Keeler Schaeffer — are describing as a referendum on SB 23.
Elected officials and residents in the area say the legislation has become a marquee issue because Lewes and Milton are where the heaviest development has taken place in recent years.
Others, however, argue a more chicken-and-egg situation is taking place. Because Schaeffer has chosen to center her campaign on the measure, some say, it has taken center stage in the primary election discourse.
Incumbent Rep. Alonna Berry (D-Milton) was narrowly elected in a special election last August, following a tumultuous period for the district in which former Rep. Stell Parker Selby was absent from Dover for the entirety of the 2025 legislative session.
Berry, who co-sponsored SB 23, said she is not surprised the legislation has become a prominent topic this primary season because the affordable housing crisis has been such a “longtime conversation” in Sussex County.
Berry said she is standing by her support of the law despite the pushback from Schaeffer and other Sussex County leaders. At the same time, she said the “singular conversation” and focus on SB 23 is challenging because it obscures other issues residents care about, such as healthcare and roads.
Schaeffer has concentrated her campaign platform on her opposition to SB 23 in yard signs, social media posts and town hall forums. She describes the law as having stripped away “people’s rights to comment.”
When asked by Spotlight Delaware why she chose to focus her campaign platform on one specific piece of legislation, Schaeffer said she believes it should be the most important issue for all Delawareans at the moment.
“It is going to change the landscape of our state for years to come,” she said. “This affects every single county, every single property owner that is going to be affected by a development going in next to them.”
While Schaeffer was clear that her mission is to repeal SB 23 if elected, she did not respond to questions about whether she has an alternative affordable housing proposal.
The Lewes-Milton area has seen numerous housing developments built in recent years, which some said explains why the confusion over an affordable housing law — and what it means for future development — has generated such a reaction in the area.
Other leaders in the district, including former University of Delaware political science professor Joe Pika, who also runs the Sussex Preservation Coalition, said the 20th district is unique in that it is more of a “purple district” with a relatively even split between Democratic and Republican voters, making the SB 23 debate more fiery.
And to Lori Stuardi, a voter in the 20th district primary, the debate has become clogged with intentionally inflammatory information and blown out of proportion for how much voters actually care about SB 23 when choosing a candidate.
“There’s a lot of misinformation, and people are cherry-picking pieces just to kind of create some strife,” she said.
Sussex County Council reacts
While SB 23 is statewide legislation, the law has produced a notably strong reaction in Sussex County, largely due to what county officials described as the measure representing another example of Dover lawmakers trying to exert control over local decisions.
Differing opinions on the law have also come to define incumbent council members and their challengers in county council races this fall.
Lawson, the county administrator, said he has been frustrated with the legislation since its drafting, when he found out it was being circulated for co-sponsors and the county had not been consulted by lawmakers on how it would impact them.
“It didn’t really create a circumstance or an environment of collaboration,” he said. “It feels more like, ‘We’re going to tell you what to do, and we’re going to tell you how to do it.’”
Lawson said the county made the decision to pause public hearings for subdivision applications in July to figure out how to comply with the law.
Still, he said he does not believe the bill’s premise that a greater housing supply will bring down prices applies to Sussex County, and he is bothered by the “thread of concerns related to local control” that it represents.
County Council President Doug Hudson and Vice President John Rieley expressed similar sentiments about the legislation and the impact it will have on the county government’s authority.
“You’ve got a Democrat-controlled Senate that steamrolled a bill through,” said Rieley, a Republican who represents the Georgetown-Millsboro area. “This is a pattern of state government usurping local control.”
Democrats Justine Cuccia and Hicks, who are challenging Hudson and Rieley, respectively, in the county council election, said they entered the race for better development and infrastructure policy. They have a different reaction to the measure than their opponents.
Hicks, who serves in a leadership role within the Sussex Preservation Coalition, said she has concerns about the law stripping the county of its ability to conduct public hearings. But she said her approach would be different from her opponent, Rieley, in that she would more effectively advocate for how the county can move forward within the confines of SB 23.
“Sussex County got itself into this mess, but I think Sussex County needs to get itself out of it,” Hicks said.
The fabric of Sussex County
The confusion about what SB 23 really means and its impact on the development process has grown since Gov. Matt Meyer signed the legislation into law in July.
But the markedly strong reaction from political candidates and county leaders in Sussex County compared to New Castle and Kent points to key characteristics of the region, according to stakeholders.
Sen. Russ Huxtable (D-Lewes), the primary sponsor of SB 23, said he is not surprised by the response in Sussex County because the “pressure of development” is so pervasive throughout the area.
“Senate Bill 23 puts the mirror in front of our face and says, ‘We need to change,’” he said.
Mike Riemann, an engineer and former president of the Delaware Homebuilders’ Association, said the county’s stronger response is, in part, a result of their current zoning codes being less strict.
This, he said, means Sussex County “has more work to do” than its northern counterparts to come into compliance with the law’s requirements.
Outside the implementation challenges, Sussex County historically has been the most conservative of Delaware’s three counties, with more Republican lawmakers in the General Assembly and a prevailing focus on low-spending and local control.
Pika, the former UD professor, said this aspect of Sussex County culture is the most compelling explanation as to why the opposition to the law is so prominent in the county.
“In the minds of many Sussex Countians, this is just another example of big brother upstate dictating what the lives of downstaters in Sussex should be like,” he said.
Maggie Reynolds is a Report for America corps member and Spotlight Delaware reporter who covers rural communities in Delaware. Your donation to match our Report for America grant helps keep her writing stories like this one; please consider making a tax-deductible gift of any amount today by visiting https://spotlightdelaware.org/support/.
